Don’t miss Charles Krauthammer on the Democrats’ decision to focus on Afghanistan, rather than Iraq in the war on terror.
Thought experiment: Bring in a completely neutral observer — a Martian — and point out to him that the United States is involved in two hot wars against radical Islamic insurgents. One is in Afghanistan, a geographically marginal backwater with no resources, no industrial and no technological infrastructure. The other is in Iraq, one of the three principal Arab states, with untold oil wealth, an educated population, an advanced military and technological infrastructure which, though suffering decay in the later Saddam years, could easily be revived if it falls into the right (i.e. wrong) hands. Add to that the fact that its strategic location would give its rulers inordinate influence over the entire Persian Gulf region, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf states. Then ask your Martian: Which is the more important battle? He would not even understand why you are asking the question.
Another must read today is John Hawkins’ Ten Questions for Al Gore and the Global Warming Crowd. In it he explains why he is skeptical that man is causing global warming and lists a few questions to share with your liberal friends.
It’s because “the Earth-is-going-to-burn-us-alive” crowd cannot answer the most basic questions about the theory that they haughtily insist is so beyond reproach that there should be no more need for debate. In fact, the most ironic thing about the global warming argument is that Al Gore and Company have declared that it’s settled, but they have to use scary stories about cities being flooded a hundred years from now and fake tales about polar bears drowning to sell it. If they’re on such rock solid scientific ground, why doesn’t the science speak for itself? Does anyone remember Sir Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein trying to get people to buy into their scientific theories by coming up with doomsday scenarios? No, of course not.
Despite that, like most conservatives, I’m open minded and could be convinced that mankind is responsible for causing global warming — but with science, not scaremongering. If the proponents of the manmade global warming theory can come up with good answers to questions like these, you can expect everyone, including me, to accept their theory:
Viewers getting their news from morning “news” shows like “Today” or “Good Morning America” must surely believe they can rely on the information they get. After all, the news departments from the networks play a role in the programs.
Similarly, viewers of ABC’s “The View” certainly must believe the information presented on a program co-owned, co-produced and co-hosted by Barbara Walters would be reliable. For years there has been a liberal slant to the opening round table “Hot Topics” segment of the program, but recently with the addition of Rosie O’Donnell the slant has turned into outright misinformation and propaganda – all with the Barbara Walters stamp of approval.
For years there was not a conservative voice to be heard in the “hot topics” discussions on “The View.” Now there is at least one conservative voice in Elizabeth Hasselbeck, but she is often either not up to speed on the topic being discussed or is shouted down or bullied by the loud and obnoxious O’Donnell. Often incorrect information is presented by co-host Joy Behar or O’Donnell and is not disputed or even questioned. Many readers have noted that Rosie is a good example of an unhinged liberal and as such it is a good thing that she is acting as a spokesperson for liberalism. That is a good point, but I fear even those who think she has gone off the deep end believe much of the supposed “news” she recites on The View. It is incredibly irresponsible for Barbara Walters and ABC to allow her to continue to spread such misinformation to such a wide audience.
Update: There is a good discussion thread on the Rosie column at Lucianne.
Hannity & Colmes will run a Rosie montage tonight.